Using Imagery to Predict Self-Confidence and Anxiety in Young Elite Athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As elite sport participation by children increases, it is important to study the psychological development of these athletes, specifically the management of self-confidence and anxiety. Imagery is one strategy that may be used by young athletes in controlling cognitions in competition (Weiss, 1991). Although research has been conducted examining imagery use by adult athletes (Hall, 2001), there have been fewer studies investigating how imagery is related to self-confidence and anxiety in young elite athletes (c.f., Vadocz et al., 1997) hence the purpose of the current study. Female participants were recruited from baton twirling competitions in Canada and the USA. Seventy-six athletes were divided into two age cohorts: 7-11 and 12-15 years. A modified version of the Sport Imagery Questionnaire (SIQ; Hall et al., 1998) and the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory 2 for Children (CSAI-2C; Stadulis et al., 2002) were given to each participant. Results indicated that developmental differences might exist between the two age cohorts in imagery use, self-confidence, and anxiety.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".